Home > At Work > What the law says > SENDA
Special Educational Needs and Disability Act (SENDA): Making reasonable adjustments
Introduction
Under the Special Educational Needs and Disability Act 2001 (SENDA), further and higher education institutions, defined under the Act as ‘responsible bodies’ are required to make ‘reasonable adjustments’. This is to ensure that students with disabilities or learning difficulties are not discriminated against or placed at a substantial disadvantage in all areas of college life and associated services to students, in particular teaching and teaching resources that include online or e-learning environments.
This means that it is now unlawful for institutions to treat a disabled person ‘less favourably’ than they treat or would treat a non-disabled person for a reason which relates to the persons’ disability. For example, it would be unlawful for an institution to turn a disabled person away from a course, or refuse to provide accessible teaching materials if that person had dyslexia or were deaf.
The question colleges or ‘responsible bodies’ must now ask themselves is to what extent and to what degree are they in a position to make ‘reasonable adjustments’ to ensure that they are not contravening the new legislation. Moreover, the law requires adjustments to be made in anticipation of those who might need them. This means that colleges must, as part of their development plans, make strategic plans outlining how anticipatory adjustments are to be made and paid for in both the short and long term.
Case Study
Imagine the following scenario.
Sheila is studying an HNC in an Office Administration related discipline (although this could be any subject at any level). Although she experienced some difficulties at school she devised her own coping strategies and managed to get by.
However, as her college course progresses she is increasingly having difficulties with her course work, in particular writing essays and reports. Her handwriting is very poor but she is able to use her computer at home to type her essays. But when she is at college she is unable to set the college computers to reflect her personal preferences, for example changing background colours and font size, and is worried she is falling behind.
Sheila has told her course tutor/lecturer that she is becoming anxious about her predicament. Although she hasn’t been formerly tested or diagnosed as being dyslexic, she reflects many of the contributory signs of someone who experiences dyslexia. For example, there is a history of dyslexia within the family.
Moreover, there are also occasions when Sheila’s receptive language skills (the way the brain processes spoken and written language) and her expressive language skills (writing and oral communication) somehow seem to let her down.
Additionally, because of an accident when she was young, Sheila also has difficulties with fine motor skills. While this doesn’t affect her in any other aspects of her life she encounters problems when using a standard keyboard and mouse. Despite Sheila’s cognitive difficulties she has above average intelligence for her age.
At a glance Sheila’s difficulties may appear to be complicated and problematic to solve. The reality is that any reasonable adjustments required to assist and empower her to complete her course, are minimal and cost nothing to implement.
Technological Solutions
When Sheila uses her computer at home she is able to set her personal preferences in ‘Accessibility Options’ which comes as standard with all versions of Microsoft Windows, i.e., since Windows 95. For example, in order to overcome any dexterity problems, Sheila is able to modify the keyboard by using FilterKeys to slow down the keyboard response. By changing the settings on her mouse she is able to have a large pointer on the desktop and can switch between the primary and secondary buttons to suit her needs for tasks such as selecting or dragging. She also finds that if she changes the background colour to a light yellow with black text (as recommended by the Dyslexia Association), increase the size of the menu fonts and use a ‘non-proportional’ font, she is able to read her scanned handouts and write her essays with relative ease. Accordingly, when she uses the Internet to do any research, she is able to increase the text size on the browser and change the background colours to suit her preferences.
The reason why Sheila is unable to use the college computers as effectively as she does at home is because Windows Accessibility Options has not been installed. Secondly, because of previous problems with computer settings being tampered with by ‘adventurous’ students in the past, the computer technicians have decided to ‘lockdown’ the computers providing limited access to all settings within Windows.
Conclusion
Therein lies a moral dilemma for many colleges, in particular those concerned with support services in IT and networks. While Sheila’s difficulties can be overcome by making ‘reasonable adjustments’ to a computer, college policy may dictate that access to Windows settings be minimised as much as possible providing access to Word, Excel, PowerPoint, Access and the Internet only. If for example, Accessibility Options has been removed (or was never installed) or users are unable to make changes to reflect their personal preferences, ie, to make reasonable adjustments, colleges may well be breaking the law. Management guidelines which cover college IT strategy and policy may also need to be revised. Innovative ways of securing computer workstations and their supporting networks to minimise damage or security while allowing students to make adjustments to reflect their needs, will need to be carefully thought through and implemented.
The fundamental issue at stake here is that students who have specific needs similar to Sheila are increasingly becoming commonplace. So what can institutions do to prevent themselves from facing possible prosecution in the light of a student accusing a college of not firstly, anticipating their needs and secondly, failing to meet their needs? Such cases as will only become more urgent as the next phase of the legislation, providing ‘Auxiliary Aids and Services’ (for example, screen reading software and/or hearing loops) comes into effect next September in 2003.
The first step is to take professional advice. SKILL for example, who provide a legal advisory service regarding all aspects of SENDA. However, AbilityNet, www.abilitynet.org.uk who work closely with many colleges and universities throughout Scotland, offer accessibility audits, training sessions, accessible IT kits, and guidance and advice on how to make the learning environment more accessible.
Although no cases of discrimination have been brought before the courts this does not mean that responsible bodies should be complacent. The Australian Discrimination Act has provided much of the content and structure of the UK’s Disability Discrimination Act (DDA) and SENDA.
Even now, few cases of discrimination have reached court. Those likely to go against an individual institution are resolved out of court in an attempt to avoid any damaging publicity, something colleges can ill afford. Research carried out by Paul Brown and Mike Adams of the National Disability Team (NDT) suggest anecdotal evidence indicates the majority of cases that reached court (and where the judgement went against the institution) were related to institutions not going far enough in making reasonable adjustments in teaching and learning practice to enable participation, in particular, access to materials in alternative formats in a timely manner.